Despite a May ruling declaring the ban unconstitutional, Wisconsin continued to target home bakers.

Wisconsin's ban on selling home-baked goods is unconstitutional, with "no real or substantial connection" to consumer protection (and a lot to do with protectionism pushed for by groups like the Wisconsin Bakers Association).

According to the state attorney-general's office, Judge Duane Jorgenson's ruling only applied to the three women who had challenged the baked-good rules in court: Dela Ends, Lisa Kivirist, and Kris Marion, all farmers and bakers who wanted the right sell homemade goods directly to consumers. They filed a lawsuit last year with help from the nonprofit Institute for Justice (IJ).

"This is more than a win for us home-based bakers," said Kivirist, "it's recognition that all small businesses have the right to earn an honest living free from irrational government regulation."

Wisconsin is one of only two places with state-wide rules banning homemade baked-good sales. (The other is New Jersey.) "Before a person could sell even one cookie [legally], they needed to acquire an expensive commercial kitchen and a burdensome commercial license," said Erica Smith, IJ's lead attorney on the case.

Nonprofit groups were permitted to sell homemade baked goods at public events up to 12 days a year, however—a paradox IJ calls "blatantly irrational."

Breaking the regulations could mean a year in jail and a $10,000 fine.

The latest ruling from Judge Jorgenson "is a major step for economic liberty and common sense in Wisconsin," said Smith. "Now, Wisconsin home bakers are free to sell their baked goods out of their home, at community events and at farmers' markets—something people are already doing in almost every other state every day."

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

Today, Jorgenson issued an opinion clarifying that no, the ruling was not limited to letting Ends, Kivirist, and Marion peddle home-baked foods, but applied to all entrepreneurs like them in the state.

A decade or so ago, I worked for a guy who claimed to know Miranda. He was on the fire department in… Was it Phoenix?.. and regularly interacted with Miranda when Miranda interacted with the police. Said the guy was a real piece of shit.

Of course he was a piece of shit, that’s how these things work their way up to the Supreme Court. It’s not nice people who get their rights trampled on, it’s the pieces of shit nobody cares about. It’s why you wind up having to defend the free speech rights of Nazis instead of girl scouts.

Farm goods in Jersey are actually pretty damn good. They’re hyper-regulated so any farm’s stand is going have their product’s quickly shrink-wrapped and tagged with an ingredient list, but there are still some good reminders outside the I-95 corridor of why we’re called the Garden State.

When you go to a Cosmo article, an image soon comes up which in an earlier, more naive era would have been called pornographic, but I won’t cause any eyerolls by using the term to this modern, hip audience.

Oh, a guy accused (in the press) of sexual misconduct hired a lawyer who represented alleged sex-harassment victims and who got money from him for a documentary.

“Immediately, many in the legal world wondered what would motivate such a principled women’s rights advocate to represent a man facing such sordid accusations.”

Let’s see…it’s a lucrative case for a guy who’s shown his ability to pay? In a field where she has expertise? And everyone has the right to the presumption of innocence? But this right means nothing at all without legal representation, if sufficiently powerful people are after you?

Creepy characters will take over the Abraham Lincoln Presidential Library and Museum on Oct. 21 for the annual “Spooktacular Evening with Abe,” a night of games, stories and costumes to welcome the Halloween season.

“Spooktacular”? Oh, that’s just too priceless. I’m guessing whoever thought that one up is too young to remember that “spook” is just another slur for “stymie,” “spearchucker” and other things that polite people don’t say anymore.

There is a fascinating theory that JWB did not fracture his fibula when he jumped out of Lincon’s box on to the stage. Instead his horse must have fallen somewhere between Ford’s Theater and the decision to stop at Dr. Samuel Mudd’s residence. Apparently the fibula fracture is entirely consistent with a rider’s foot stuck in the stirrup when a horse then falls upon it. Cannot recommend taking the Surratt Society JWB Escape Tour enough. Fascinating stuff.

“”This isn’t about revising history or hiding history or taking something away,” Scott Vignos, director of strategic initiatives in the Office of Institutional Diversity, told the group. “It’s about revealing history. It’s about learning about our past and drawing lessons from that past.”…

“”You can expect to be uncomfortable as we discuss issues of race and history and exclusion and really important topics that are so salient today and that we’re dealing with as a community just as they’re being dealt with and talked about nationally,” said Vignos, who is a member of the Building and Place Name Evaluation Workgroup.

“Also leading the community engagement session were Brandi Douglas, assistant director of outreach in the Office of Institutional Diversity, and Oregon Multicultural Librarian Natalia Fernandez.”

“You can expect to be uncomfortable as we discuss issues of race and history and exclusion and really important topics that are so salient today and that we’re dealing with as a community just as they’re being dealt with and talked about nationally,” said Vignos, who is a member of the Building and Place Name Evaluation Workgroup

Is it so clear as to not require saying that the “you” who can expect to be uncomfortable is just the white people? Because apparently any discomfort felt by blacks must be addressed and corrected, so this very much IS an effort to “hide” , “revise” and/or “take away” historical reality.

What a waste of such careful verbiage, when the ultimate goal of your communication is simple misrepresentation*.

*-WAS “lying”, back in a more forthright** era. **-WAS “honest” back in a more honest*** era. ***-‘honest’, adj. (on-ist) NOW means hectoring, lying, redefining terms per convenience, fantasizing, rejecting facts and truth, and intimidating, as used in: “We need to have an honest discussion about race.”